7 Myths About Women and Work

By Catherine Fox

A book about being a woman, raising children, succeeding in a leadership role, and living a full life, this work debunks the seven most commonly held misconceptions about women and their professional careers. Penned by an award-winning journalist, this book discusses topics such as the gender pay gap, motherhood and a career, meritocracies in the workplace, and the use of quotas.

• Language: English
• Publisher: NewSouth
• Release date: Sep 1, 2012
• ISBN: 9781742241173

Catherine Fox

Catherine Fox is Academic Director of the Manchester Writing School at Manchester Metropolitan University. An established and popular author, her debut novel, Angels and Men (reissued in 2014) was a Sunday Times Pick of the Year. The first in her Lindchester series, Acts and Omissions, was chosen as a Guardian Book of 2014 and two subsequent volumes, Unseen Things Above (2015) and Realms of Glory (2017), were rapturously received. Catherine is married to the Bishop of Sheffield and has a judo black belt.

Book preview

Antonia.

INTRODUCTION:

WHY 7 MYTHS?

When Margaret Whitlam died in early 2012 several tributes described her as a woman of many attributes, with a great sense of humour, who was very much at ease with herself. At her funeral the eulogies made the point that she had been confident enough to be simply who she was – not a ‘first lady’ prototype or a female consort from central casting, but an intelligent, self-possessed woman on an equal footing with her husband, former Prime Minster Gough Whitlam. In an era when most married women’s lives centred on the home, Margaret Whitlam carved out a valuable public role for herself in a particularly traditional space.

It sounds deceptively simple in hindsight, but such equilibrium and strong sense of identity are still rare things to observe in women, even today. Our gender continues to define and contain us in ways that are complex, frustrating and often defy commonsense. And that’s why a century after women won the vote in this country and started the hard task of dismantling the barriers to fully participating in society, there is still a pressing need to examine the mythology about being female in the workforce.

This is not a book about how to be Margaret Whitlam, but it is about understanding why there are many reasons women continue to confront a series of perplexing and often contradictory ideas and assumptions about how they live their lives, the roles that are deemed acceptable for them in society and in the world of paid work. You will not find conspiracy theories or unhelpful ‘he said, she said’ debates here, but lots of information about human nature and behaviour in hierarchies that have allowed fundamental misconceptions to flourish. These myths are perpetuated in the business world because they are comfortable and the way things have operated for decades – indeed, in some cases, for centuries. In fact, it was after hearing a few of them stated with great conviction by a CEO I interviewed for the Financial Review that the 7 myths idea took shape. I realised the conversation had a familiar ring and I’d heard the same old, irritatingly inaccurate excuses for the lack of women in business, the gender pay gap and other problems trotted out time and again by senior executives of both sexes. A couple of my workmates suggested (probably to stop my rant) that I make a list and write it up for the ‘Corporate Woman’ column. It seemed like a good idea and a rather elegant way of covering off on a few of my main bugbears. So the list of 7 myths was born.

It quickly became apparent that the column had struck a chord. Just as I found the 7 myths format a useful shorthand for communicating some of the enduring themes I noticed in my work on this area, so it seemed my readers found it a handy way of summarising a lot of the trends, misunderstandings and frustrations they noticed in their workplaces. They told me the column helped to get their thoughts in order and also provided ammunition for those informal workplace conversations that actually carry a lot of weight and influence attitudes. The feedback kept coming in, as well as quite a few invitations to speak about the myths at conferences and businesses around Australia. On every occasion I found the discussion yielded even more evidence that the myths needed dismantling.

These ideas were obviously remarkably tenacious, and not just among men, with many women telling me they had absorbed some of the generalisations about their gender and never really stopped to analyse or test them against actual experience. Most of the myths have survived in the face of strong evidence to the contrary, as we shall see.

As I pursued my myth-busting mission it was apparent there was a consciousness-raising element to this exercise that I had never thought would prove so potent and gratifying. The faltering progress towards better gender equity in all sorts of sectors had left many women worn down and despondent. Yet puncturing the myths did not seem to add to that effect, but, according to most of my feedback, provided more of a confidence booster by offering some ways to actively counter this unhelpful discourse.

After a period of glacial change, and a backsliding in some indicators, it’s not all bad news at the coalface these days. Some progress towards a fairer workplace has begun after a long period of inertia during the first decade of this century, although much of it is about catching up. It builds on some of the major steps made to provide women with the same opportunities as men in the workforce over many decades: we no longer have a marriage bar in the public service, women are not forced to resign when they have children, there’s paid maternity leave and the right to flexible work is becoming more widespread. But we cannot ignore the many inequities that still affect women in all sorts of jobs, despite many years of solid economic growth in Australia and plenty of effort to generate some action.

Australia is not alone. Many developed economies have registered sluggish progress along the path to better gender equity over the last few years. There are many reasons – social, historical, economic, organisational and behavioural – and most will be examined as I analyse the myths. But it is also clear to me that this is not because women see no need for change or have given up after many tussles for a fair go, nor that the men still dominating management ranks of business have formed a conspiracy to block equity measures. It’s more a combination of passive resistance and the defence of the status quo, driven by fear of change, rather than concerted objection.

It’s a hard nut to crack. The surge of women into the workplace while they remain stuck with the primary domestic role means that most of us have a daily ‘to do’ list of daunting proportions that leaves us exhausted. Storming the barricades for equal rights or even turning up to another diversity discussion can fall down the priority list when a job deadline approaches and you have to be out of the office by 5.30 pm to pick up the kids. And it’s not as though our male peers or managers have exactly encouraged the discussion or even acknowledged that there is a genuine problem.

We have a way to go before that is achieved, according to Australian academic Dr Hannah Piterman in Women in Leadership:

Despite the clear business case backed by extensive research that has aligned improved financials and healthier, more positive cultures with the increase of women at senior ranks, the gender parity chasm still exists. Not only are women excluded from the leadership table, but they are held to account for being women.

The business case for gender equality is clear but the solutions are complex. Gender diversity is by no means unanimously accepted as a strategic priority. Perceptions of its importance vary, particularly between men and women …

The resulting dynamic sees women having to prove that they are extraordinary. That they are without needs or demands, and that they are unencumbered by family in order to avoid being sidelined as less ambitious, as not having the prerequisite experience and of not wanting to commit.

This is one tall order if you don’t happen to be extraordinary – and that’s most of us. It’s particularly a burden when you are shouldering a fair bit of the housework and caring duties, while trying to keep healthy and have a social life tucked in there somewhere. I’d describe that as living a full life, not ‘having it all’ by the way. But amid all of those activities, it is dauntingly off-putting to confront the idea that no matter how much you achieve or how efficient you are, the fact that you are female is at some level framing and colouring your actions. I sometimes describe this dynamic as the difference between having the benefit of the doubt – which is usually extended to men, at least initially – and fighting for credibility as a female. It’s a grind to be forced to constantly prove your worth and it’s exhausting. No wonder women sometimes ask me if maybe it would be best if we all just put our heads down and got on with it and let someone else with fire in their feminist belly do the agitating. Well, no. As tempting as that sounds it just isn’t going to lead to change and we know that because these myths have survived and even thrived for that exact reason.

I have deliberated about the main contenders for myth-busting, and there are quite a few more I could have tackled (women lack confidence, for example, or take too long to make decisions). However, many years of writing and speaking about this topic with all kinds of people and in every major city in Australia has given me a pretty clear idea of what is being discussed in this area at an individual and corporate level, as well as the broader social conversation on gender. Luckily this discussion is no longer confined to women and a growing number of men turn up at forums these days, some a little reluctantly perhaps, but they are there nonetheless. No matter how much agitation there is from women, improvements to this scenario also have to be about men, particularly those with the power to make a difference and influence attitudes.

I think some of the inertia until recent times has come from the misguided belief that we live in a post-feminist world and ‘all that stuff’ got sorted out, so whatever happens in workplaces now is not about gender but personal choice. The currency of the 7 myths shows this to be far from the truth. Propping up these myths too is an outdated series of workplace practices developed for a male breadwinner model, now well past its use-by date. I’m realistic about challenging these structures and know we can’t transform society and the corporate world quickly by just rebutting the myths. But I’m optimistic that we can influence our cohort and have found that a judicious sprinkling of facts and research to defend one’s point of view is an important tool when this topic comes up. It’s remarkable how the same questions arise in just about any debate relating to gender and jobs, and I have reflected this in my selection.

Obviously there are areas of overlap too, so I have tried to cross-reference my myths as much as possible and in the process realised that belief in the classic meritocracy, or even playing field myth (myth 1), has a lot to answer for, playing a part in just about every myth. I figured it was important to make those connections clear, to accentuate the harm from letting one set of misconceptions fuel another. Many of these themes have been tackled in ‘Corporate Woman’ and in the pages of the Financial Review, so I have incorporated a number of my columns and articles throughout the book, also using some of the case studies that caught my eye at the time or pertinent interviews.

Debunking the myths has also involved taking a closer critical look at some of the current business efforts to address ‘diversity’ – an unfortunate corporate euphemism that avoids mentioning women or gender (see myth 1). The myths have certainly hampered efforts to research and test the best methods for making progress. There’s a willing audience these days for a neat package to tick the diversity box, as many Australian organisations belatedly focus on how to comply with some of the new reporting measures, such as those for ASX companies introduced in 2011 and in the revised Workplace Gender Equity legislation.

For many in business this is uncharted territory and the hunt for a solution is music to the ears of a new breed of diversity consultants, so a wave of programs, workshops and tools – often promising a quick fix – has been doing the rounds. The myths are still colouring many of these efforts, so my advice is to take a ‘buyer beware’ approach to some of these ‘solutions’. We’ve been hearing about women’s mentoring and sponsoring programs, networking groups, diversity training and pay audits, gender targets and even becoming ‘gender bilingual’, and the topic du jour is unconscious bias. Many of these will be examined a bit more closely in the next chapters to assess if they are helping or hindering the myth-busting.

While I’m not suggesting all these efforts should be ditched, it must be acknowledged that there are some time-wasting diversions around too. On the other hand, I think women do need forums to talk about this topic because it’s all too easy to believe the barriers they encounter are all their own fault and they need to learn from others’ experiences. Getting men involved in this conversation is a great idea too, as is examining how bias can infiltrate business practices. However, some trends smack of bandwagons. Unconscious bias, for example, appeals to the business world because it is not overtly about gender and thus avoids a more tricky conversation. Understanding how and why the myths evolved and persist raises some of these difficult kinds of questions that are more likely to deliver useful answers. If there’s one thing we know now after years of inaction it’s that a circuit breaker is needed to avoid more time and effort being wasted in reinforcing the status quo.

That’s what the readers of ‘Corporate Woman’ tell me they are ready for – and they are good enough to get in touch to let me know what they think of the column, both positive and negative. Many say they have cut out the column and pinned it to the tearoom wall, which is highly motivating for me. I suppose it is also evident that a publication like the Financial Review attracts a readership skewed to those in professional and white-collar jobs and management, but it certainly reaches a wider range of readers too. Many of those who follow the column have a personal and professional interest in issues such as flexible work, maternity leave and childcare provisions, careers and leadership, as well as the whole gamut of cultural factors that influence social change, philanthropy and small business issues. They may be running an office or their own business or simply trying to hold down a job in a demanding environment, and I am always conscious of the range of information they may be looking for and using in their workplaces.

Given this audience, however, there are areas that are not regularly tackled in the column, but which are, of course, parts of this conversation, such as violence against women, health and reproductive rights, and the problems faced by Indigenous women. Often the focus of the column is on career issues, the professions or the debate around such practical issues as tax deductibility of childcare fees. These are sometimes labelled middle-class welfare concerns that are of less importance than those problems facing low income and casual workers, and women living in developing countries. I think that view needs to be rebutted upfront, mainly because it is a tactic to make women give up and shut up, and it doesn’t make sense. After all, if we give up our middle-class fight the result will be middle-class white men retaining the power and status, which is hardly going to lift women out of poverty in the developing world.

This argument and defence of the myths remind us that what we are struggling to access is being firmly defended because it is worth having – it’s about power and influence in and beyond workplaces. We need women to aspire to and reach management and leadership positions, because they can then make decisions that affect a range of employees and become role models to those coming up through the ranks. If these women are not at the table then the slow change to our workplaces will grind to a halt. We need them to be there, representing a women’s perspective, normalising women’s participation and different career trajectories. They are part of the essential effort to legitimise women as leaders in organisations and society, and change the debate.

I’ve noticed arguments that depend on an either/or dichotomy often crop up when the subject of women and work is discussed. Either you are a good mother or a good worker, a professional on the job or a nice person, grateful for a decent job or a selfish, privileged complainer. The myths have been a handy way of perpetuating this trade-off in roles that hamper all women and help keep alive the notion that women in white-collar jobs are just never satisfied. I think the fact that women with these advantages are finding it difficult to be treated fairly means we have a real problem, not a reason to be ashamed and give up. The principles of gender equity are universal and don’t prevent us from mobilising around causes to support those from less advantaged backgrounds and in all parts of the world. Paying women less than men for the same job is a problem whether you live in Sydney or Dhakar, and it is not culturally relative.

This topic came up in when I had the great privilege of interviewing film maker and activist Abigail Disney (granddaughter of Roy Disney) shortly before she visited Australia in 2011. Her documentary, Pray the Devil Back to Hell premiered in 2008 and focuses on the peace movement of local women in Liberia, who later helped elect Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf president. Along with Liberian peace activist Leymah Gbowee, Johnson-Sirleaf won the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize. Now the film has been shown as part of a miniseries, Women, War and Peace, which premiered in the United States in October 2011, exploring women’s roles in conflict in Colombia, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Liberia. Disney made the point that women have transformed philanthropy through their special interest in the ‘girl effect’, and were needed at the table to make a change happen in relation to the way funds are distributed to those in need.

Women in the US have changed the philanthropic world, not just on women’s issues but looking for local participation. That is something